dawho5

I'm in the same camp as Loss and goc, I really love that match. I don't agree that it should have been number 1 ahead of Magnum/Tully on the Starrcade set, but I would have had it at 2 for sure.

I've seen either highly positive or highly negative reactions to that match. It seems like now it's about 50/50 between the 2. Could be initial reaction was more positive?

I just have to remark about how awful that Tubes song is. It was one of the banes of my existence when I had to rely on a 60s-80s radio station to get me through the work day.

If there was a place to start a good one-click resource like that, it's here.

In the interest of discussion, I have a few questions. In matches with juniors/cruiserweights it becomes essential for somebody to be a base, even if that responsibility switches off at times. And there are big men who are great bases for smaller guys to fly around as well as big men who just don't get how. Where do the numbers account for this? And something that factors into every match I've ever seen is adaptability. How do the wrestlers react to botches or unexpected crowd reactions? Can they get the crowd into the match when their usual tricks don't work? These are very important questions and don't seem to be covered in the numbers.

Okay, time out. Did nobody else notice the bit about the intent of the thread partially being to start arguments about the numbers given? Because to me that was one of those "red flags" that might serve as a warning.

Because you think he's a better wrestler based on the footage you have seen? I've read some of your stuff on Brisco and you seem to present reasons enough without trying to boil everything down to numbers in categories. One of the reasons I struggle with wrestling video games like EWR/TEW is that they lose all feeling and end up becoming incredibly empty because it boils everything down to numbers or letter grades. So many factors go into every wrestling match that it's impossible to come up with enough numbers to cover all of it.

That Rocky Raymond stuff is really glorious. It's so much more epic than the nonsense I filled my younger years with. First, it's ballsy as all Hell. Secondly, I can only wish I had been that passionate about anything rather than bounce between hobbies. As goofy as that stuff is, and as funny as your discussions of it are, it is some of the more awesome nerd stuff floating around the internet for how committed Rocky is to his commentary.

When I decorate a Christmas tree, I'm doing it in a Santo mask.

Incredible stuff. At some point I'm gonna have to watch this feud in chronological order because if the ringwork is anywhere near as good as the promos it's definitely going to be worth my time.

Already did. Watching 300+ 2000s matches from Japan was a little bit of a slog. Took me out of the wrestling mood for a few months actually.

I think more people should do this kind of thing for guys who are now in a bigger role somewhere. To me the interesting part about reading this is seeing how Thatcher performs in different match types against different opponents. It really points out the strengths and weaknesses to a degree that just looking at the highly thought of matches would not allow. This could be something of a resource if, say in 5-10 years, Thatcher has found a home a la Danielson in RoH 2002-2006 where he really shines. A running tab of how he performed at different stages of his career would show where he hit big improvements in his game, how he handles the things he struggled with early different, the how of carrying a no-talent guy to a decent or even good match as compared with the early struggles with that process. With a lot of the really highly regarded guys, we don't have access to much early footage of them struggling to find ways to put their imprint on a match in a positive way. We usually end up with their matches against the guys they end up replacing as top dogs, not so much the more gritty parts of their journey. If I ever do get into indies, that's probably the reason I will do it, to track the progress of personal favorites and see how wrestling careers develop.

I don't know if Hash is overlooked as much as you think. My guess is he has a lot of support around here and will do very well. He may be under-talked-about though.

One thing I'm noticing is there is a huge variance in how people are looking at this thread. It seems like most are assuming it is Parv trying to make a point in a way that offends them. Joe, SW, Loss and I see his point and seem to agree that it is valid. So maybe it would clear things up if Parv gave a clear and concise version of the purpose of the thread. Unless it is another of those Parv stirring the pot deals, which seems to be immensely successful. If that's the case, cheers.

Look, I think the problem here is less about the issue being argued and more about people rejecting the attempt to put a control on how they vote. I doubt you'd find many people who would say that a guy who was opening shows/jobbing regularly to midcarders while not being involved in featured stories was greatly important to his/her promotion while this was going on. And if that happened to be the majority of their career, odds are they didn't do much of note within the business, which is probably an agreeable statement. That won't stop some people from really enjoying the work they did and possibly thrwing them a sentimental vote somewhere down their lists. I can tell you this for sure. Trying to tell people that they shouldn't do that and it's wrong won't get you anywhere. Nor will telling them they can't. And for statistical reasons I think that it's just silly in the first place. Let's say somebody or a few people do vote for Johnny Rodz. Is that somehow going to skew the voting and throw the whole poll off? Because out of all the people voting, the odds are pretty slim that you're going to get a vast majority voting for the exact same career lower midcarder and putting them ahead of someone more deserving. In fact, the few votes they do garner for being a favorite will very likely not put them on the final list anyway. Are you telling me you think that there aren't 100 main event/upper midcard/midcard guys who will get more votes than a Brad Armstrong or Johnny Rodz or Koko B. Ware will? That seems like a really low probability. I get that you want to avoid the poll being skewed by bad voting Parv. And I do think that this kind of thing has the best intentions behind it. But the truth is, it comes off as heavy handed at it's very best and I really don't think it's all that necessary.

I think the biggest thing working against him is that by the time he was comfortable with the role he had been given, it was time to pass the torch to Tanahashi and start to fade into the background. Not necessarily right away, but he only got a year or two to be top dog after settling into the character of Yuji Nagata that NJPW wanted. Who knows, if Inoki isn't such a mark for shooters Nagata may have had a way better peak with a gimmick/character he was comfortable with at the time.

Watch the Faulkner vs. Woods bout for a slow burn from trickster to pissed off. The Faulkner vs. Breaks match on youtube is pure badass Faulkner.

I second Nishimura. I think a few British guys deserve a good look as well. Vic Faulkner had two very distinct sides to his character, the cheeky guy with the trickster attitude and the "pissed off, I'm gonna punch you in the face even if it's illegal you son of a bitch" side to him. I've only seen a few matches where the aggressive aspect comes through but it's fucking great. Jon Cortez is a great, great (best ever?) technician who can ratchet up the heat when he wants to. He's like Dean Malenko if Dean ever learned how to work a crowd and was better on the mat.

Actually, yeah, Sasaki did come along right around that time. Either way, he held up far better than the All Japan guys did. And Tenryu had a pretty solid run into the 2000s, going strong past the point that Misawa and co. had started breaking down. Probably has something to do with him working a less dangerous and physically demanding style early in his career. And it's not so much the style Tanahashi or Nakamura works, but the style their opponents tend to favor. Taking all the punishment they do adds up over time. I'd say the lack of unnecessarily dangerous head drops has to help their chances of longevity. Even so, taking that many concussive shots has to add up. Plus Tanahashi has bad knees due to all of the high flying stuff. It's sort of similar to the Chris Benoit situation for me. Wrestlers (especially in japan nowadays) are very likely to do lasting damage to themselves in order to put on "better matches". It's something that I think will eventually be addressed in a similar manner to how the NFL did after all those retired players started having problems. Probably not anytime soon, but I think it will happen at some point.

Those Japanese stars who went into their 40s and 50s were from before Japanese wrestling became so physically demanding. Look at how beat up Misawa and crew got in the 90s and the effects in the 2000s. They were all still going in the late 2000s, but as shells of their former selves. Compare that to Tenryu and Sasaki from the generation of stars before who were still going relatively strong while those guys were fading. It's a different landscape now.

Yatsu is a mixed bag. His execution could be way off depending on the match and any chops/punches/lariats he threw were pretty likely to look really weak. He was never going to be more than a midcard guy as far as charisma goes. But man, the guy had fire and his suplexes and slams looked awesome. And he tended to work really smart most of the time, which is a huge plus.

Here's the thing for me on Choshu. I really, really, REALLY dislike how he used the sharpshooter (sasorigatame, whatever) so often, relied on restholds to get through large parts of matches and tended to use the backdrop exclusively as a transition. However, he somehow managed to keep doing all of that and make it seem important within the match. How he did that I'll never know. There are a few unquestionable things he had going for him. His charisma was off the charts and he had great fire, both of which he used to incredible effect. His look and his persona fit everything else he did. When he was in matches where he could just hit bursts of big offense he was fucking amazing. His execution was phenomenal as well, everything looked impactful. Ultimately I actually preferred Yatsu in that tag team for having more variety, selling and bumping far better and setting up his big spots well.

That video was all kinds of kitsch. Julius Caesar, complete with Cleopatra (who had a golden throne at ringside), what looked to be Genghis Khan, a mobster family, (could it be....) Satan, a very kayfabe cat gimmick, what looked to be the Grinch but as a gymnast-style babyface, there's just so much to mention I can't get to all of it. And that's based on 10 out of 16 minutes. Looks like it'd be a bit goofy on the whole, but the kitsch factor is certainly strong.